Apple store is down... -> PowerMac G5 Single 1.8 GHz

Let's keep _this_ thread on the single processor PowerMac, then. There's already one for the iBooks...
 
The 1,8ghz powermac is also very tempting. $500 less for one CPU less and a slightly slower frontside bus.. acceptable if not even great. However, to me this system is still no option to an iMac with 20''. Let's first see, how much the difference in the frontside bus influences the overall benchmarks cause by now the single G5 powermac would be a lot more expensive with a 20'' cinema screen than a 20'' iMac with very similar specs..
 
Woohoo! Attention students: get the power of a G5 in your hands for $1259 (minus SuperDrive)!

Wow... now that's one deal I may just have to jump on... this old G4 is finally getting a little long in the tooth, and that single 1.8GHz G5 machine is looking like a mighty fine deal... with the ability to upgrade until your nose bleeds, this is looking like a much more attractive offer than the iMacs, to me, IMHO.
 
Hmm....they throttlde down the FSB to 600Mhz, even compared to the old SP 1.6Ghz which was 800Mhz. That would be an interesting comparison. 1.8/600 vs 1.6/800
 
is it just me or do the new power mac specs match the middle imac specs exactly?
and then you get your 17 inch monitor with the imac?
at the same price?
somebody explain this to me please
 
You will be able to add hdds or optical drives, change the graphic card, add other cards and use it with an existing screen. In other words: for pro users.
 
Yop: minimal solution for pro users.
I would prefer an even more minimal solution for lower cost (similar to a barebone Athlon 2800 machine). But that's already a big step in the right direction.
 
Just a bad idea... isn't it a way to sell more macs without having to buy too many G5 processors that are so difficult to find ?
 
I remember reading a quote from Apple concerning the hooplah over a low-end ________ computer (fill in the blank however you like: headless iMac, bare-bones, etc.) and it said that Apple chooses not to enter or compete in the low-end, sub-$800 category simply because they don't see a way that they can make money doing that.

While we all wish and hope that Apple exists solely to serve our computing needs, and sometimes we think we know better than Apple, I have to agree with them. eMachines was the "next great thing" in their day -- cheap, throw away computers that cost little to manufacture and even less to sell... now look at them. I want Apple to keep innovating and producing high-quality, mid-to-high-end computers. While a bare-bones customizable Macintosh at under $800 would be awesome, I agree that I don't see the money-making potential in it, and, if it would ultimately hurt Apple in the long run, I say don't do it. At least not until it's feasible.

I'll try and dig up a link for that quote -- I know heresay is no good without some info to back it up.
 
Why sub 800$? I'd want a 900-1000$ entry-level desktop... And I'm sure many future Mac users would agree. ;-)
 
eMac. Entry-level. Desktop. $800.

While it's not every persons' dream machine, it certainly fits the bill as an entry-level, decently powered desktop.

$800 is the lowest price Apple has on a desktop, so that's probably why they said "sub-$800."
 
I still won't be satisfied unless they put out a $500-or-so "headless eMac"...

It would just be a good idea for so many reasons...
 
Hang on. headless emac? so you want minimal expansion, (2 x DIMM slots, one hdd, one optical bay) a "consumer" featureset (no digital audio, no firewire800, no gigabit ethernet, embedded low-end video "card") tell me why again? so you can stick an aftermarket monitor on it?
 
I think Apple offers too many systems with very little difference from one to the next with the exception of the CPU and FSB speeds on the PowerMac line. With the spec of the new entry level PowerMac, $1299 or $1399 seems to be more in line with what you're getting than $1499. The price goes north of $1499 once you begin adding the necessities. Many may compare the new PM with the new iMac and note all you get with the iMac including LCD, etc...but if you really need it, there's just no comparing the options you have with an expandable tower.
 
The eMac's an AIO. I meant a desktop machine in the sense of headless. Sorry for the misunderstanding. The eMac's certainly a fine machine and so's the iMac, but I like to choose my own display (or use one I've liked for years)...
 
Oscar Castillo said:
I think Apple offers too many systems with very little difference from one to the next with the exception of the CPU and FSB speeds on the PowerMac line.
Click to expand...

If you think Apple offers too many different configurations of machines now, you should have been around in the mid 90s when Gil Amelio was CEO of Apple. At that time, you could get one of like 20 different configurations of PowerMac, all with cryptic names like "Quadra 800/850/850AV/900/950" along with the PowerMac "4400, 5200, 5260, 5400, 5500, 6100, 6200, 6300, 6320, 6360, 7x00 series, 8x00 series, 9x00 series, etc."

That was a bad, bad time. Apple's got it right with the division it's got now: Cosumer vs. Pro, and laptop vs. desktop underneath those two. And the eMac. Apple typically offers far less distinct lines of computers than other companies: take a trip over to Dell.com and get lost in their confusion for a while, then come back to Apple.com and enjoy the serenity that is K.I.S.S.!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top